Narrative:

We briefed the approach and were planning on xxr. Approach then cleared us for xxl. This required us to brief the new approach per SOP. Approach control also kept us high on the approach requiring us to slow down and descend at a higher than normal descent rate to be in a position to land. We were approximately 5-7 miles away when we realized we were going to be too high and ATC approved a 360 to land. Upon completion of the 360 we were stabilized for landing around 700-800 ft. We then completed a normal landing with no further incident. After landing the first officer and I talked about the approach and decided that although it wasn't unsafe it could have been better. We could have asked for delay vectors or executed a missed approach. I think there were a couple of reasons; the main reason being fatigue. Our original pairing had us doing a turn but that was canceled. We had come in at xa:25 and were originally due out at xf:30 which kept being pushed back until we finally departed at xi:52. We were not allowed to leave the airport so we ended up staying in the airport for almost nine hours between our two flights. That is more time than the average person works in a day. I believe the other reason the event occurred was approach control changing the expected runway and us in turn having to get set up for and brief the approach which subsequently caused us to be high for the approach. I think that if we have a flight cancellation and we are going to be expected to stay at the airport for more than say five hours that we should be released to go to a hotel/crash pad/quiet room so we can be refreshed when it is time for us to do our next flight

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Q400 flight crew reports unstabilized approach after late runway change and ATC handling contributed to the crew being high. Fatigue from a long duty day was also cited as a factor.

Narrative: We briefed the approach and were planning on XXR. Approach then cleared us for XXL. This required us to brief the new approach per SOP. Approach control also kept us high on the approach requiring us to slow down and descend at a higher than normal descent rate to be in a position to land. We were approximately 5-7 miles away when we realized we were going to be too high and ATC approved a 360 to land. Upon completion of the 360 we were stabilized for landing around 700-800 FT. We then completed a normal landing with no further incident. After landing the First Officer and I talked about the approach and decided that although it wasn't unsafe it could have been better. We could have asked for delay vectors or executed a missed approach. I think there were a couple of reasons; the main reason being fatigue. Our original pairing had us doing a turn but that was canceled. We had come in at XA:25 and were originally due out at XF:30 which kept being pushed back until we finally departed at XI:52. We were not allowed to leave the airport so we ended up staying in the airport for almost nine hours between our two flights. That is more time than the average person works in a day. I believe the other reason the event occurred was Approach Control changing the expected runway and us in turn having to get set up for and brief the approach which subsequently caused us to be high for the approach. I think that if we have a flight cancellation and we are going to be expected to stay at the airport for more than say five hours that we should be released to go to a hotel/crash pad/quiet room so we can be refreshed when it is time for us to do our next flight

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.